TECHNOLOGY OVERVIEW

Geochemical exploration surveys can establish the

presence and distribution of hydrocarbons and relate
them to specific exploration and exploitation needs.
For reconnaissance surveys, seeps and micro-seeps are
direct evidence that hydrocarbons were generated.
The composition of the seeps can indicate whether the
geological play is most likely to contain natural gas or
crude oil. The seepage data allow explorationists to
quickly and economically screen large areas for targets
of greatest interest. For example, reconnaissance sur-
face geochemical surveys can be used to guide the
location and extent of subsequent seismic coverage.
For evaluating exploration leads and prospects, geo-
chemical surveys can identify areas associated with
strong hydrocarbon anomalies. This allows operators
to high-grade their prospects on the basis of hydrocar-
bon indicators. For development projects, detailed
microseepage surveys can help evaluate infill or
stepout drilling locations, delineate productive limits
of under-developed fields, and identify bypassed pay
or uncontacted reservoir compartments. Geochemical
survey results add value to seismic data by identifying
hydrocarbon-charged reservoir compartments.
The design and sampling of geochemical surveys are
flexibleinfluenced by the exploration objectives,
geological setting, and target size, among other consid-
erations. For regional studies, data may be collected
along seismic lines or designed to traverse across fea-
tures of structural or geological significance.
Sample spacing for geochemical surveys may vary
from 500 to 1,000 meters (m) at one extreme, to 50 to
100 m at the other. The use of sampling grids is rec-
ommended for small exploration targets. Whenever
possible, operators should sample over a recent dis-
covery to calibrate the data. In active fields, contours
of microbial data may indicate low values adjacent to
wells due to pressure depletion related to production.
Bypassed production can be seen by isolated microbial
anomalies (highs).
Based on a workshop sponsored by PTTCs Eastern Gulf
Region on February 10, 1999, in Jackson, MS.
SPEAKERS:
Geochemical Technologies:
Deet Schumaker, Geo-Microbial Technologies
Science & Statistics of Geochemistry:
Joel Gervitz, InterScience
Data Integration:
Gary Rice, GeoFrontiers Corp.
Prospecting Using Geochemistry:
Paul Harrington, W.L. Gore & Associates
Canadian Hunters Experience Using Geochemical Methods:
Richard Wyman, Wyman & Associates
SURFACE HYDROCARBON
DETECTION SHOWS PROMISE
BOTTOM LINE
Operators can use surface geochemical techniques for reservoir characterization, field devel-
opment, and monitoring production patterns, as well as more established uses for high-grad-
ing leases, and prospects. Wider usage of surface geochemical exploration methods in mature
basins also shows great promise.
PROBLEM ADDRESSED
Hydrocarbon micro-seepage, which can be measured by various surface geochemical
techniques, is common. Leaked hydrocarbons move predominantly in a vertical direc-
tion (with geological exceptions). Data confirm that oil and natural gas production lev-
els respond quickly to changes in reservoir conditions. There are dependable pre-
drilling methods available to quickly screen areas for oil and natural gas, such as sur-
face geochemical prospecting technologies. These can be used in conjunction with
other data to reduce exploration costs and increase success rates. After drilling, geo-
chemical methods can be used to define the limits of production and identify
bypassed hydrocarbons.
KEY WORDS:
Surface Hydrocarbon
Detection
Geochemical
Prospecting
Geochemical Methods
Hydrocarbon Leakage
LESSONS LEARNED
1. Vertical micro-seepage of hydrocarbons (both oil
and gas) is easily detected by surface geochemical
methods. However, neither the depth of the
reservoir(s) nor the amount of hydrocarbon present
can be determined by geochemical prospecting.
2. Reconnaissance geochemical surveys used in con-
junction with other data, such as 3-D seismic, provide
an effective method to detect bypassed oil and deter-
mine the productive limits of a field.
3. Success with geochemical prospecting depends
upon selecting the right method and using proper
sample design and quality control. It also is necessary
to have calibration to known oil and gas occurrences,
and integration with other available surface and sub-
surface data.
4. The potential benefits of a successful geochemical
exploration program include:
G Direct detection of hydrocarbons
G Documentation of source rock, hydrocarbon matura-
tion, and migration
G Ability to high grade areas prior to purchasing leases
or conducting seismic surveys
G Leads for further evaluation after running seismic
surveys
G Geochemical data to constrain mapping of amplitude
anomalies between seismic lines
G Evaluation of areas where seismic surveys may be
ineffective
G Ability to locate traps poorly imaged with seismic
FIELD RESULTS
Case histories document an excellent predictive capa-
bility for surface geochemical techniques. One study
in the early 1980s in Kansas and Colorado used soil
samples collected at 0.1-mile intervals within 0.5
miles of 49 proposed well locations. All geochemical
analyses and interpretations were completed prior to
drilling. Thirty-nine wells were subsequently drilled
(ignoring the surface geochemical study), yielding
three producing wells, three non-commercial wells,
and 33 dry holes. The microbial survey correctly pre-
dicted all 33 dry holes, the three producing wells, and
two of the three non-commercial wells. Additional
case histories support surface geochemistrys ability to
high-grade locations.
Case studies from a variety of petroleum provinces
verify that integrating geochemical detection methods
with 3-D seismic data can increase success rates, thus
lowering oil and gas finding costs. Canadian Hunter
increased its drilling success rate to 71% by combin-
ing geochemical techniques and 3-D seismic. This is
more than double the drilling success rate of 34%
using seismic data alone. By integrating geochemical
data with 3-D seismic data, operators in South
America achieved a 95% drilling success rate, and
reduced their finding costs by 43%.
Within producing fields, geochemical methods can be
used to define productive field limits and aid field
development and management. Although the strategy
cannot predict a projects economics, it can determine
whether hydrocarbons are present in the target area.
CONNECTIONS:
Joel Gevirtz, Interscience
1838 W. Alabama, Houston, TX 77098
ph 713-522-6244, fax 713-522-2044
e-mail intsci@ix.netcom.com
Paul Harrington, W.L. Gore Assoc.
100 Chesapeake Blvd., Box 10
Elkton, MD 21922-0010
ph 410-566-4773, fax 410-506-4780
e-mail pharring@wlgore.com
Gary Rice, GeoFrontiers Corp.
5130 Boyd Blvd., Suite A
Rowlett, TX 75088
ph 972-412-7959, fax 972-412-7942
Deet Schumacher, Geo-Microbial Technologies
PO Box 132, Ochelata, OK 74051
ph 918-535-2281, fax 918-535-2564
e-mail GMTgeochem@aol.com
Richard Wyman, President
Wyman & Associates
University Research Park
400 Wakara Way, Salt Lake City, UT 84108
ph 801-584-2475, fax 801-584-2406
For information on PTTCs Eastern Gulf Region and its activities contact:
Ernest A. Mancini, Professor of Geology, University of Alabama
Box 870338 202 Bevill Bldg.
Tuscaloosa, AL 35487
ph 205-348-4319, fax 205-348-0818, e-mail emancini@wgs.geo.ua.edu
The not-for-profit Petroleum Technology Transfer Council is funded primarily by the US Department of Energys Office of Fossil
Energy, with additional funding from universities, state geological surveys, several state governments, and industry donations. No
specific application of products or services is endorsed by PTTC. Reasonable steps are taken to ensure the reliability of sources for
information that PTTC disseminates; individuals and institutions are solely responsible for the consequences of its use.
Petroleum Technology Transfer Council, 2916 West T. C. Jester, Suite 103, Houston, TX 77018
toll-free 1-888-THE-PTTC; fax 713-688-0935; e-mail hq@pttc.org; web www.pttc.org